83 FR 34816 - Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Infrastructure Monitoring Requirements for the 2008 Pb, 2010 SO2
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 141 (July 23, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 141 (July 23, 2018)
| Page Range | 34816-34819 | |
| FR Document | 2018-15480 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 141 (Monday, July 23, 2018)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 34816-34819] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-15480] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R08-OAR-2018-0388, FRL-9980-67--Region 8] Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Infrastructure Monitoring Requirements for the 2008 Pb, 2010 SO2, 2010 NO2 and 2012 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Utah AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve elements of State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions from the State of Utah to demonstrate the State meets infrastructure monitoring requirements of the Clean Air Act (Act or CAA) for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) promulgated for lead (Pb) on October 15, 2008, nitrogen dioxide (NO2 ) on January 22, 2010, sulfur dioxide (SO2 ) on June 2, 2010, and fine particulate matter (PM2.5 ) on December 14, 2012. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires that each state submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by the EPA. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 22, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08- OAR-2018-0388 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from www.regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. [[Page 34817]] Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. The EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate Gregory, Air Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6175, [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ``we,'' ``us'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA. I. Background On October 15, 2008, the EPA revised the level of the primary and secondary Pb NAAQS from 1.5 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) to 0.15 [mu]g/m\3\ (73 FR 66964, Nov. 12, 2008). On January 22, 2010, the EPA promulgated a new 1-hour primary NAAQS for NO2 at a level of 100 parts per billion (ppb), based on a 3-year average of 98th percentile 1-hour daily maximum concentrations, while retaining the annual primary standard of 53 ppb. The secondary annual NO2 NAAQS remains unchanged at 53 ppb (75 FR 6474, Feb. 9, 2010). On June 2, 2010, the EPA promulgated a revised primary SO2 standard at 75 ppb, based on a 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations (75 FR 35520, June 22, 2010). Finally, on December 14, 2012, the EPA promulgated a revised annual PM2.5 standard by lowering the level to 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\ and retaining the 24-hour PM2.5 standard at a level of 35 [mu]g/ m\3\ (78 FR 3086, Jan. 15, 2013). Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA, states are required to submit infrastructure SIPs to ensure their SIPs provide for implementation, maintenance and enforcement of the NAAQS. These submissions must contain any revisions needed for meeting the applicable SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2), or certifications that their existing SIPs for PM2.5 , Pb, NO2 and SO2 already meet those requirements. The EPA highlighted this statutory requirement in an October 2, 2007, guidance document entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (2007 Memo). On September 25, 2009, the EPA issued an additional guidance document pertaining to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM2.5 ) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)'' (2009 Memo), followed by the October 14, 2011, ``Guidance on Infrastructure SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)'' (2011 Memo). Most recently, the EPA issued ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)'' on September 13, 2013 (2013 Memo). II. What is the scope of this rulemaking? The EPA is acting upon the SIP submissions from Utah that address the infrastructure monitoring requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the 2008 Pb, 2010 SO2 , 2010 NO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The requirement for states to make a SIP submission of this type arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP submissions ``within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),'' and these SIP submissions are to provide for the ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS. The statute directly imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submissions, and the requirement to make the submissions is not conditioned upon the EPA taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that ``[e]ach such plan'' submission must address. The EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as ``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Although the term ``infrastructure SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, the EPA uses the term to distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from submissions that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under the CAA, such as ``nonattainment SIP'' or ``attainment plan SIP'' submissions to address the nonattainment planning requirements of part D of title I of the CAA; ``regional haze SIP'' submissions required by the EPA rule to address the visibility protection requirements of CAA section 169A; and nonattainment new source review (NSR) permit program submissions to address the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part D. Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing and general requirements for infrastructure SIP submissions, and section 110(a)(2) provides more details concerning the required contents of these submissions. The list of required elements provided in section 110(a)(2) contains a wide variety of disparate provisions, some of which pertain to required legal authority, some of which pertain to required substantive program provisions, and some of which pertain to requirements for both authority and substantive program provisions.\1\ The EPA therefore believes that while the timing requirement in section 110(a)(1) is unambiguous, some of the other statutory provisions are ambiguous. In particular, the EPA believes that the list of required elements for infrastructure SIP submissions provided in section 110(a)(2) contains ambiguities concerning what is required for inclusion in an infrastructure SIP submission. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides that states must provide assurances that they have adequate legal authority under state and local law to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C) provides that states must have a SIP-approved program to address certain sources as required by part C of title I of the CAA; and section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that states must have legal authority to address emergencies as well as contingency plans that are triggered in the event of such emergencies. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Examples of some of these ambiguities and the context in which the EPA interprets the ambiguous portions of section 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) are discussed at length in our notice of proposed rulemaking: Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 , 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, and 2010 NO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standards; South Dakota (79 FR 71040, Dec. 1, 2014) under ``III. What is the Scope of this Rulemaking?'' With respect to certain other issues, the EPA does not believe that an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission is necessarily the appropriate type of action in which to address possible deficiencies in a state's [[Page 34818]] existing SIP. These issues include: (i) Existing provisions related to excess emissions from sources during periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction (SSM) that may be contrary to the CAA and the EPA's policies addressing such excess emissions; (ii) existing provisions related to ``director's variance'' or ``director's discretion'' that may be contrary to the CAA because they purport to allow revisions to SIP-approved emissions limits while limiting public process or not requiring further approval by the EPA; and (iii) existing provisions for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) programs that may be inconsistent with current requirements of the EPA's ``Final NSR Improvement Rule,'' 67 FR 80186, Dec. 31, 2002, as amended by 72 FR 32526, June 13, 2007 (``NSR Reform''). III. What infrastructure elements are required under sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? CAA section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing requirements for SIP submissions after a new or revised NAAQS is promulgated. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements the SIP must contain or satisfy. These infrastructure elements (listed below) include requirements such as modeling, monitoring and emissions inventories, which are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS.110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control measures. 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data system. 110(a)(2)(C): Program for enforcement of control measures. 110(a)(2)(D): Interstate transport. 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources and authority, conflict of interest, and oversight of local governments and regional agencies. 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring and reporting. 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency powers. 110(a)(2)(H): Future SIP revisions. 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with government officials; public notification; and PSD and visibility protection. 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling/data. 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees. 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/participation by affected local entities. Of these infrastructure elements, element B is the subject of this action, as all other elements were acted on in the EPA rulemaking titled Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO 2 , 2010 SO2 , and 2012 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Utah.\2\ A detailed discussion of element 110(a)(2)(B) is contained in the next section. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ 81 FR 50626 (August 2, 2016). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IV. How did Utah address the infrastructure elements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? The Utah Department of Environmental Quality (Department or UDEQ) submitted certification of Utah's infrastructure SIP for the 2008 Pb NAAQS on January 19, 2012; 2010 NO2 NAAQS on January 31, 2013; 2010 SO2 NAAQS on June 2, 2013; and 2012 PM2.5 on December 4, 2015. Utah's infrastructure certifications demonstrate how the State, where applicable, has plans in place that meet the requirements of section 110 for the 2008 Pb, 2010 NO2 , 2010 SO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. These plans reference the Utah Code Annotated (UCA) and the Utah SIP. These submittals are available within the electronic docket for today's proposed action at www.regulations.gov. The UCA and the Utah SIP referenced in the submittals are publicly available at http://le.utah.gov/xcode/code.html and https://deq.utah.gov/legacy/laws-and-rules/air-quality/sip/. Air pollution control regulations and statutes that have been previously approved by the EPA and incorporated into the Utah SIP can be found at 40 CFR 52.2320. V. Analysis of the State Submittals Ambient air quality monitoring/data system: Section 110(a)(2)(B) requires SIPs to ``provide for establishment and operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary'' to ``(i) monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality, and (ii) upon request, make such data available to the Administrator.'' The State's submissions cite UAC rule R307-110-5, which incorporates by reference SIP Section IV (Ambient Air Monitoring Program), and provides a brief description of the purposes of the air monitoring program approved by the EPA in the early 1980s and most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744). Pursuant to its Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP), the Department makes arrangements to operate and maintain federal reference monitors and establishes federally-approved protocols for sample collection, handling and analysis. The State's QAPP was most recently approved on November 28, 2016, with an annual update in November of 2017. Utah's annual monitoring network plan (AMNP), is made available by the Department for public review and comment prior to submission to the EPA. Additionally, the State of Utah submits data to the EPA's Air Quality System database in accordance with 40 CFR 58.16. Finally, Utah's 2017 AMNP was approved by the EPA through a letter dated October 27, 2017 (available within the docket). The State provides the EPA with prior notification when changes to its monitoring network or plan are being considered. This action proposes to approve the State's submittal in reference to element B: Ambient air quality monitoring/data system. Previous action was not taken in the final EPA ruling titled Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO2 , 2010 SO2 , and 2012 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Utah.\3\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ 81 FR 50626 (August 2, 2016). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- We find that Utah's SIP and practices are adequate for the ambient air quality monitoring and data system requirements and therefore propose to approve the infrastructure SIP for the 2008 Pb, 2010 SO2 , 2010 NO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS for this element. Approval of element B will satisfy any outstanding requirements under Section 110(a)(2). VI. What proposed action is the EPA taking? In this action, the EPA is proposing to approve infrastructure element B for the 2008 Pb, 2010 SO2 , 2010 NO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS from the State's certifications as shown in Table 1. Table 1--List of Utah Infrastructure Elements That the EPA Is Proposing To Approve ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Proposed for approval Element ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 19, 2012 submittal--2008 Pb NAAQS.................... (B) January 31, 2013 submittal--2010 NO2 NAAQS................... (B) June 2, 2013 submittal--2010 SO2 NAAQS....................... (B) December 4, 2015 submittal--2012 PM2.5 NAAQS................. (B) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ VII. Statutory and Executive Orders Review Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting federal requirements and [[Page 34819]] does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); Is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866; Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4); Does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because this action does not involve technical standards; and Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Greenhouse gases, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: July 13, 2018. Debra Thomas, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8. [FR Doc. 2018-15480 Filed 7-20-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![34816 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules
sections 110(a)(2)(D) and 126. While the • Is certified as not having a ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
tribes do not operate an ozone monitor, significant economic impact on a AGENCY
the nearest ozone monitors to Fort Hall substantial number of small entities
Reservation are in Ada County, Idaho; under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 40 CFR Part 52
Boise area (AQS site IDs 160010010 and U.S.C. 601 et seq.); [EPA–R08–OAR–2018–0388, FRL–9980–
160010017) and Butte County, Idaho;
• Does not contain any unfunded 67—Region 8]
Idaho Falls (AQS site ID 160230101).
Past and present design values for ozone mandate or significantly or uniquely
Approval and Promulgation of State
are complete, valid and below the affect small governments, as described Implementation Plan Revisions;
current standard. The EPA’s modeled in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Infrastructure Monitoring
2023 average and maximum design of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); Requirements for the 2008 Pb, 2010
values suggest these ozone • Does not have Federalism SO2, 2010 NO2 and 2012 PM2.5 National
concentrations will continue to decline. implications as specified in Executive Ambient Air Quality Standards; Utah
We therefore propose to find that it is Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
reasonable to conclude that emissions AGENCY: Environmental Protection
1999); Agency (EPA).
from Washington will not contribute
significantly to nonattainment or • Is not an economically significant ACTION: Proposed rule.
interfere with maintenance of the 2015 regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
ozone NAAQS at the Fort Hall Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
Reservation. A memorandum 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
elements of State Implementation Plan
summarizing our evaluation can be • Is not a significant regulatory action (SIP) revisions from the State of Utah to
found in the docket for this action. subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR demonstrate the State meets
IV. Proposed Action 28355, May 22, 2001); infrastructure monitoring requirements
As discussed in Section II, • Is not subject to requirements of of the Clean Air Act (Act or CAA) for
Section 12(d) of the National the National Ambient Air Quality
Washington concluded that emissions
Technology Transfer and Advancement Standards (NAAQS) promulgated for
from the state will not significantly
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because lead (Pb) on October 15, 2008, nitrogen
contribute to nonattainment or interfere dioxide (NO2) on January 22, 2010,
with maintenance of the 2015 ozone application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and sulfur dioxide (SO2) on June 2, 2010,
NAAQS in any other state. The EPA’s and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) on
updated modeling, discussed in Section • Does not provide the EPA with the December 14, 2012. Section 110(a) of
III confirms this finding. We are discretionary authority to address, as the CAA requires that each state submit
proposing to approve the Washington appropriate, disproportionate human a SIP for the implementation,
SIP as meeting CAA section health or environmental effects, using maintenance and enforcement of each
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements for the practicable and legally permissible NAAQS promulgated by the EPA.
2015 ozone NAAQS. The EPA is methods, under Executive Order 12898 DATES: Written comments must be
requesting comments on the proposed (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). received on or before August 22, 2018.
approval.
In addition, the SIP is not approved ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
V. Statutory and Executive Order to apply on any Indian reservation land identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08–
Reviews or in any other area where the EPA or OAR–2018–0388 at http://
Under the CAA, the Administrator is an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
required to approve a SIP submission tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of instructions for submitting comments.
that complies with the provisions of the Indian country, the rule does not have Once submitted, comments cannot be
CAA and applicable federal regulations. tribal implications and will not impose edited or removed from
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). substantial direct costs on tribal www.regulations.gov. The EPA may
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the governments or preempt tribal law as publish any comment received to its
EPA’s role is to approve state choices, public docket. Do not submit
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
provided that they meet the criteria of electronically any information you
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
the CAA. Accordingly, this action consider to be Confidential Business
merely approves state law as meeting List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Information (CBI) or other information
federal requirements and does not whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
impose additional requirements beyond Environmental protection, Air Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
those imposed by state law. For that pollution control, Incorporation by etc.) must be accompanied by a written
reason, this action: reference, Intergovernmental relations, comment. The written comment is
• Is not a significant regulatory action Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping considered the official comment and
subject to review by the Office of requirements. should include discussion of all points
Management and Budget under Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. you wish to make. The EPA will
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, generally not consider comments or
Dated: July 11, 2018. comment contents located outside of the
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011); Chris Hladick, primary submission (i.e., on the web,
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 Regional Administrator, Region 10. cloud, or other file sharing system). For
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory [FR Doc. 2018–15625 Filed 7–20–18; 8:45 am] additional submission methods, the full
action because SIP approvals are BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
EPA public comment policy,
exempted under Executive Order 12866; information about CBI or multimedia
• Does not impose an information submissions, and general guidance on
collection burden under the provisions making effective comments, please visit
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); commenting-epa-dockets.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Jul 20, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM 23JYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_34957/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules 34817
Docket: All documents in the docket contain any revisions needed for particular type of SIP submission from
are listed in the www.regulations.gov meeting the applicable SIP requirements submissions that are intended to satisfy
index. Although listed in the index, of section 110(a)(2), or certifications that other SIP requirements under the CAA,
some information is not publicly their existing SIPs for PM2.5, Pb, NO2 such as ‘‘nonattainment SIP’’ or
available, e.g., CBI or other information and SO2 already meet those ‘‘attainment plan SIP’’ submissions to
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. requirements. The EPA highlighted this address the nonattainment planning
Certain other material, such as statutory requirement in an October 2, requirements of part D of title I of the
copyrighted material, will be publicly 2007, guidance document entitled CAA; ‘‘regional haze SIP’’ submissions
available only in hard copy. Publicly ‘‘Guidance on SIP Elements Required required by the EPA rule to address the
available docket materials are available Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the visibility protection requirements of
either electronically in 1997 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National CAA section 169A; and nonattainment
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at Ambient Air Quality Standards’’ (2007 new source review (NSR) permit
the Air Program, Environmental Memo). On September 25, 2009, the program submissions to address the
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, EPA issued an additional guidance permit requirements of CAA, title I, part
1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado document pertaining to the 2006 PM2.5 D.
80202–1129. The EPA requests that if at NAAQS entitled ‘‘Guidance on SIP Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing
all possible, you contact the individual Elements Required Under Sections and general requirements for
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour infrastructure SIP submissions, and
CONTACT section to view the hard copy Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient section 110(a)(2) provides more details
of the docket. You may view the hard Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)’’ (2009 concerning the required contents of
copy of the docket Monday through Memo), followed by the October 14, these submissions. The list of required
Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding 2011, ‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure SIP elements provided in section 110(a)(2)
federal holidays. Elements Required Under Sections contains a wide variety of disparate
110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2008 Lead (Pb) provisions, some of which pertain to
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate
National Ambient Air Quality Standards required legal authority, some of which
Gregory, Air Program, U.S.
(NAAQS)’’ (2011 Memo). Most recently, pertain to required substantive program
Environmental Protection Agency
the EPA issued ‘‘Guidance on provisions, and some of which pertain
(EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–AR,
Infrastructure State Implementation to requirements for both authority and
1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act substantive program provisions.1 The
80202–1129, (303) 312–6175,
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)’’ on EPA therefore believes that while the
gregory.kate@epa.gov.
September 13, 2013 (2013 Memo). timing requirement in section 110(a)(1)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: is unambiguous, some of the other
Throughout this document, wherever II. What is the scope of this statutory provisions are ambiguous. In
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is rulemaking? particular, the EPA believes that the list
intended to refer to the EPA. The EPA is acting upon the SIP of required elements for infrastructure
I. Background submissions from Utah that address the SIP submissions provided in section
infrastructure monitoring requirements 110(a)(2) contains ambiguities
On October 15, 2008, the EPA revised of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) concerning what is required for
the level of the primary and secondary for the 2008 Pb, 2010 SO2, 2010 NO2 inclusion in an infrastructure SIP
Pb NAAQS from 1.5 micrograms per and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The submission.
cubic meter (mg/m3) to 0.15 mg/m3 (73 requirement for states to make a SIP Examples of some of these
FR 66964, Nov. 12, 2008). On January submission of this type arises out of ambiguities and the context in which
22, 2010, the EPA promulgated a new CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to the EPA interprets the ambiguous
1-hour primary NAAQS for NO2 at a section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP portions of section 110(a)(1) and
level of 100 parts per billion (ppb), submissions ‘‘within 3 years (or such 110(a)(2) are discussed at length in our
based on a 3-year average of 98th shorter period as the Administrator may notice of proposed rulemaking:
percentile 1-hour daily maximum prescribe) after the promulgation of a Promulgation of State Implementation
concentrations, while retaining the national primary ambient air quality Plan Revisions; Infrastructure
annual primary standard of 53 ppb. The standard (or any revision thereof),’’ and Requirements for the 1997 and 2006
secondary annual NO2 NAAQS remains these SIP submissions are to provide for PM2.5, 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, and 2010
unchanged at 53 ppb (75 FR 6474, Feb. the ‘‘implementation, maintenance, and NO2 National Ambient Air Quality
9, 2010). On June 2, 2010, the EPA enforcement’’ of such NAAQS. The Standards; South Dakota (79 FR 71040,
promulgated a revised primary SO2 statute directly imposes on states the Dec. 1, 2014) under ‘‘III. What is the
standard at 75 ppb, based on a 3-year duty to make these SIP submissions, Scope of this Rulemaking?’’
average of the annual 99th percentile of and the requirement to make the With respect to certain other issues,
1-hour daily maximum concentrations submissions is not conditioned upon the EPA does not believe that an action
(75 FR 35520, June 22, 2010). Finally, the EPA taking any action other than on a state’s infrastructure SIP
on December 14, 2012, the EPA promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. submission is necessarily the
promulgated a revised annual PM2.5 Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of appropriate type of action in which to
standard by lowering the level to 12.0 specific elements that ‘‘[e]ach such address possible deficiencies in a state’s
mg/m3 and retaining the 24-hour PM2.5 plan’’ submission must address.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
standard at a level of 35 mg/m3 (78 FR The EPA has historically referred to 1 For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides
3086, Jan. 15, 2013). these SIP submissions made for the that states must provide assurances that they have
adequate legal authority under state and local law
Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the purpose of satisfying the requirements to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C) provides
CAA, states are required to submit of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) that states must have a SIP-approved program to
infrastructure SIPs to ensure their SIPs as ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ submissions. address certain sources as required by part C of title
I of the CAA; and section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that
provide for implementation, Although the term ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ states must have legal authority to address
maintenance and enforcement of the does not appear in the CAA, the EPA emergencies as well as contingency plans that are
NAAQS. These submissions must uses the term to distinguish this triggered in the event of such emergencies.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Jul 20, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM 23JYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_34957/page/2.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules 34819
does not impose additional Greenhouse gases, Lead, Nitrogen Additional instructions on
requirements beyond those imposed by dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, commenting or visiting the docket,
state law. For that reason, this proposed Reporting and recordkeeping along with more information about
action: requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile dockets generally, is available at http://
• Is not a significant regulatory action organic compounds. www.epa.gov/dockets.
subject to review by the Office of Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Management and Budget under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, Dated: July 13, 2018. technical information contact: Kenneth
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, Debra Thomas, Moss, Chemical Control Division, Office
January 21, 2011); Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8. of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 [FR Doc. 2018–15480 Filed 7–20–18; 8:45 am] Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
regulatory action because this action is BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
not significant under Executive Order 20460–0001; telephone number: (202)
12866; 564–9232; email address:
• Does not impose an information ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION moss.kenneth@epa.gov.
collection burden under the provisions AGENCY For general information contact: The
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 40 CFR Part 721 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY
• Is certified as not having a 14620; telephone number: (202) 554–
significant economic impact on a [EPA–HQ–OPPT–2011–0941; FRL–9979–23]
1404; email address: TSCA-
substantial number of small entities Hotline@epa.gov.
Proposed Modification of Significant
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
New Uses of a Certain Chemical SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded Substance
mandate or significantly or uniquely I. General Information
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
affect small governments, as described Agency (EPA). A. Does this action apply to me?
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act ACTION: Proposed rule.
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); You may be potentially affected by
• Does not have federalism SUMMARY: This action is a notification this action if you manufacture, process,
implications as specified in Executive that additional data has been added to or use the chemical substance contained
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, the docket for the proposal to amend the in this rule. The following list of North
1999); significant new use rule (SNUR) under American Industrial Classification
• Is not an economically significant section 5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances System (NAICS) codes is not intended
regulatory action based on health or Control Act (TSCA) for oxazolidine, to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
safety risks subject to Executive Order 3,3′-methylenebis [5-methyl-. This guide to help readers determine whether
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); action also reopens the comment period this document applies to them.
• Is not a significant regulatory action for an additional 30 days for public Potentially affected entities may
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR comments based on the additional data include:
28355, May 22, 2001); added to the docket. The proposal • Manufacturers or processors of the
• Is not subject to requirements of would amend the SNUR to allow certain chemical substance (NAICS codes 325
Section 12(d) of the National new uses reported in the significant new and 324110), e.g., chemical
Technology Transfer and Advancement use notice (SNUN) without requiring manufacturing and petroleum refineries.
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because additional SNUNs and make the lack of
this action does not involve technical This action may also affect certain
certain worker protections a new use. entities through pre-existing import
standards; and
DATES: Comments must be received on
• Does not provide the EPA with the certification and export notification
discretionary authority to address, as or before August 22, 2018. rules under TSCA. Chemical importers
appropriate, disproportionate human ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, are subject to the TSCA section 13 (15
health or environmental effects, using identified by docket identification (ID) U.S.C. 2612) import certification
practicable and legally permissible number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2011–0941, by requirements promulgated at 19 CFR
methods, under Executive Order 12898 one of the following methods: 12.118 through 12.127 and 19 CFR
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 127.28. Chemical importers must certify
The SIP is not approved to apply on www.regulations.gov. Follow the online that the shipment of the chemical
any Indian reservation land or in any instructions for submitting comments. substance complies with all applicable
other area where the EPA or an Indian Do not submit electronically any rules and orders under TSCA. Importers
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has information you consider to be of chemicals subject to a SNUR must
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian Confidential Business Information (CBI) certify their compliance with the SNUR
country, the rule does not have tribal or other information whose disclosure is requirements. The EPA policy in
implications as specified by Executive restricted by statute. support of import certification appears
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, • Mail: Document Control Office at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B. In
2000), nor will it impose substantial (7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention addition, any persons who export or
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
direct costs on tribal governments or and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental intend to export a chemical substance
preempt tribal law. Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania that is the subject of a proposed or final
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001. SNUR are subject to the export
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 • Hand Delivery: To make special notification provisions of TSCA section
Environmental protection, Air arrangements for hand delivery or 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b)) (see § 721.20),
pollution control, Carbon monoxide, delivery of boxed information, please and must comply with the export
Incorporation by reference, follow the instructions at http:// notification requirements in 40 CFR part
Intergovernmental relations, www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. 707, subpart D.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:31 Jul 20, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM 23JYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_34957/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2018-07-21 00:48:53
Document Modified: 2018-07-21 00:48:53
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Proposed rule. | |
| Dates | Written comments must be received on or before August 22, 2018. | |
| Contact | Kate Gregory, Air Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6175, [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 34816 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Carbon Monoxide; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Greenhouse Gases; Lead; Nitrogen Dioxide; Ozone; Particulate Matter; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements; Sulfur Oxides and Volatile Organic Compounds |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR